Tunicates Have Human Like Immune System?

The authors said:

The body of a tunicate seems simple, Dishaw says, but the new study shows “this simple system has incredible complexity” in its immune system.

1 Like

So you misread their comment, thinking “incredible” was actually “irreducible”? I’m just wondering how you made the leap from “incredible complexity” to “irreducible complexity.”

Irreducible complexity is incredible!

1 Like

As long as you’re not making an argument from incredulity I agree!

:smiley:

No actually I just can’t read. I didn’t even realize it didn’t say ‘irreducible’ until you said something.

1 Like

I can read, but what I read isn’t what was written! Folks like you give me hope for this site. Thanks.

I don’t see why not. Can we think of the cell membrane itself as an immune system?

Bacteria has an immune system called CRISPR. It is very different from our immune system but intelligent researchers designed system using the bacteria immune system to make babies in China with altered genomes.

Write that column - I’ll read it! I love skiing. :slight_smile:

A post was merged into an existing topic: Mung and Swamidas (again)

If God created bodies and those bodies able to defend to survive, in a post fall world as YEC sees it, then prediction of immune systems being very alike, a little alike, would follow from a common blueprint.
So some creature, needing it that way, would easily adapt to a immune system like a unrelated creature.
The immune system is flexible but within boundaries.
Common design can explain everything in biology from origins creationism(s) would say.

Since humans have immunoglobulins and complement, would you expect the same proteins with the same exact sequences in the tunicates, being that they come from a common blueprint?

2 Likes

Thank you? It actually would be fun to learn more about tunicate immunity.

2 Likes

@T_aquaticus
Here’s my way of thinking. Every organism has problems to solve, and there can be more than one way to solve them, but one way may be the best. Immunity is something all organisms require. Bacteria have solved it several ways, mainly by recognizing foreign DNA (restriction enzymes and CRISPER) One is trainable, the other innate. In vertebrates we see different mechanisms but the same principles.

It will be interesting to see how the tunicate system compares compares with humans. I don’t expect the same exact sequence or way of doing things, but it’s reasonable to expect some similarity if the the two are related by common descent. It need not be simpler in tunicates.

It would also be informative to look at colony defense in sea anemones.

1 Like

My comment was aimed more at the concept of a “common design” as part of a creationist perspective spoken of by others. Why change a sequence if it is already functional? It would seem to me that complement would work equally well at killing bacteria in a human as it is a tunicate, as one example. Human toll-like receptors already bind bacterial flagella, LPS, and other general bacterial and viral antigens, and they would do the same in tunicates as well.

You’re welcome. May it be your best column of the year.

in gods brilliance of a common blueprint, after a fallen world, all systems esily can duplicate themselves in different biological entities. Anything is possible and probable in a glorious biological system.

So you see no reason why these sequences related to the immune system would produce a phylogenetic signal?

Its not a tree but just a natural result from a common design feature. The thing is creationism would not agree we were created with a immune system. That itself is a byproduct of biology trying to preserve itself.
Then its a common design feature that would affect all biology.

73 posts were split to a new topic: Phylogenetic Tree is Not Evidence Against Design?